Defending the interests of the Australian plutocracy

Propaganda campaigns from vested interests have unduly influenced the past three election results, and the mark of the Australian plutocracy doesn't end there, writes David Llewellyn-Smith.

We all know these days that the Australian economy is bogged down in overconcentration. In every major sector, duopolists and oligopolists reign. Whether it's banks, supermarkets, retailers, airlines, utilities, resources, media, packaging, food and beverages, transport and logistics, you name it, competition is thin on the ground.

We pay a high price for this in entrenched inflation and lousy productivity, but increasingly, it appears, we are also paying a price in our liberal democratic system.

One doesn't like to be alarmist about such things but there is a pattern of behaviours that is accelerating, and the casual observer might join the dots and see a shift in Australian democracy away from sound principle and the rule of law.

Consider. The last three elections have all been unduly influenced by powerful interests. The 2007 result in favour of Kevin Rudd was considerably aided by a union-funded advertising campaign against WorkChoices. Along with climate change, it was the defining issue of the campaign.

In the 2010 election it was the mining interests' turn to distort process via public pressure on the mining tax legislation. After that result, the new Labor Government allowed the three big miners to write their own tax rates that have since been shown to have gutted the attempted tax.

The most remarkable result in the recent election was not that the Labor Government got tossed out but that a mining magnate took just a few weeks to buy the balance of power in the Senate. It is he that will now determine whether or not such legislation as the carbon and mining taxes are abolished altogether, unencumbered by legal or ethical constraint.

It doesn't stop there. In the post-GFC context, we have also seen a dramatic confusion of interests in the public and private obligations of the banking system. Australian taxpayers now guarantee or fund, explicitly or implicitly, most of the liabilities in our financial system. We do this with almost no quid pro quo, with no control over the companies benefitting and no pecuniary offset. Our regulators, those tasked with governing this melange, exist in a bubble of secrecy. We have no idea what their benchmarks are, whether they are appropriate, what values they represent, nor what their long term goals are.

This has been engineered in crisis but is yet to be examined in the open. And when it is, what hope is there that interests won't dominate the discussion?

And wider business has learned the lessons of these repeat episodes. We are now daily exposed to vested interests' propaganda campaigns in which businesses seek favour via ballot box intimidation, and our professional political class seems to have no compass beyond power to see off these attacks.

Now, in the past couple of days, we have also had a series of corruption allegations revealed against the Reserve Bank of Australia, which the Australian Securities and Investments Commission inexplicably failed to investigate, and today a new set of explosive allegations against corporate superstars Leighton Holdings which, again, ASIC has failed to investigate. Our elite police appear compromised in one way or another.

This is not a local problem. Increasingly it is an issue worldwide, in political systems on both the Left and the Right. In China, a fading developmental model is now universally recognised to require revitalisation. But in the way are the interests that benefit from the old ways and the outcome of the struggle is as yet unknown.

We have all marvelled at the manner in which the GFC unfolded around the Wall Street coup in Washington. From the capture of financial regulators to the funding of politicians, Wall Street elites blew up the American economy as they feathered their own nests, and virtually none have paid any price since. Much the same can be said of the UK.

Increasingly, it seems, a globally motivated super-elite come and go as they please, a plutocracy of wealthy individuals that are above the law; indeed, they seem able to make the law.

An economist with the International Monetary Fund, Fred Hirsch, has treated these issues. In his book Social Limits to Growth, Hirsch argued that the modern market economy is successful only to the extent that it stands on the shoulders of a pre-capitalist ideology. He was concerned that the growth and maturation of the market economy undermined the moral and ideological foundations upon which it depended. The market economy depends on respect for rules that cannot be enforced by law alone. It depends on the owners of business being permitted to maximise their own wealth and incomes in certain defined ways, and on others in society foregoing the opportunity to take advantage of their own positions to do likewise.

lindsay Cooper:

RobW:

03 Oct 2013 9:32:27pm

"..why can not other people see it."

People have understandably become complacent. Humanity has an impressive track record of coming up with clever technological fixes to serious problems. I suspect our past successes blind us to the fragility of our place on the planet and the risks that we face.

MJLC:

03 Oct 2013 6:51:43pm

Looking around it's hard to escape the conclusion the future belongs to the trilobites KB - we mammals are already being white-anted from within by "elected representatives" with allegiances to sauropods and velociraptors - I doubt anything as severe as an asteroid over the Yucatan will be needed to effect regime change this time.

Jimmy :

03 Oct 2013 7:00:27pm

I love that Palmer got in . It proves that Abbott did not actually "win" the election , just that labour lost . Palmer will prove to be the Bain of Abbott's most probably single term as prime minister .

2bob:

03 Oct 2013 8:16:05pm

I think not. Palmer will seek something good for palmer and the news-limited coalition and he will make a deal. If palmer pushes too hard the media will gang up on one of his senators. They will have some skeletons in the closet and even if they don't some low life will spread rumors or invent something. The plutocracy will march onward.

Bighead1883:

03 Oct 2013 8:16:50pm

@Jimmy;True Jimmy the axe will be ground.With Clive in the Reps and 3 Senators it is a milestone achievement of a new political party.Like One Nations QLD short lived meritocracy one hopes PUP has staying power.Balance of power is a serious reality so Clive better keep his backside cleaned as Abbott the kisser is coming.Now who saw Abbott trying to kiss SBY in Indonesia in the newspaper?non News Ltd of course.

NevinEsk:

04 Oct 2013 9:01:48am

Palmer is far more than the LNP which is a takeover of the National Party in Qld by the city based Libs. The Nats in that existing party kissed arse to gain political strength and in so doing lost the respect of many country folks.Clive is old National Party much like Barnaby. Both will prove to be a thorn in the city based LNP's side. I just hope it is a sharp thorn as the Libs have proven time and time again that they care little for the country people who supply most of our food. The LNP will trample on the farmers of Australia and it will take Clive and Barnaby, maybe even Warren, to stand up and protect the lives and income of our farms and those who work on them.

hph:

mick:

03 Oct 2013 3:00:49pm

How great is our democracy that anyone with drive and an idea can get up and have a go. We should be cheering the diversity of ideas and contests that will flow from the senate. Breaking the green dream is the peoples choice and we should be happy and joyous. Its only 6 years and we can turf them out. Its a celebration and representation of our fine people . Palmer party professionals and also upstanding 4WD enthusiasts. Finally someone who knows how hard it is to drive the cruiser around town with those stupid bike lanes and those silent electric cars sneaking up to steal a parking spot or two if you have a real 4WD. Very proud of our democracy and those that preserve our right to use fossil fuels. Never change

Sarah:

03 Oct 2013 8:09:51pm

'How great is our democracy- we should be cheering the diversity of of ideas and contests that will flow from the senate breaking the green dream- finally someone how knows how hard it is to drive the cruiser around town without those stupid bike lanes and silent electric cars. Very proud of our democracy that preserves our right ot use fossil fuels"By all means let us have a democracy with a diversity of ideas which does noth have room for bike riders- clean green energy and heaven forbid silent cars. But hang on-what happened to the diversity of ideas and contests? What happened to democracy?That is what the people asked as oligopolice patrolled the streets to make sure we polluted and jammed them.

Mycal:

jennbrad:

03 Oct 2013 3:06:37pm

We have always known that with money comes power - exercised in various ways.

In the case of Clive Palmer, I found the fully funded candidates and ill thought out "policies" a considerable worry. But in a sense, that's democracy - if we try to constrain people like him, we constrain everyone.

It might work better for us to look at the way elections work and the count is done, to ensure that any "party" (even if a front for one person's ambition) requires a certain percentage of votes to continue in the count, and introducing optional preferential for both upper and lower houses. I doubt it would discourage them, but it might reduce the effect of their money.

MJMI:

04 Oct 2013 12:52:03am

A lot of the problems could be solved if voters got to select where their preferences went.

If ever a practice deserved the description of being run by "faceless men" it's the distribution of Senate preferences. The present above the line/below the line Senate ballot form is not working for the electorate but for the small "parties" who get to make exchange deals on preferences.

DaveD:

04 Oct 2013 9:43:58am

I personally dispise politicains and the corrupt system of democracy we practise. But speaking statisically, since the lower house is where govt is formed, we should abolish single member electorates and elect the pollies based on the % of the votes.

There are 150 seats and a voting population of approx 14M so a thresehold of 93333 (0.667%) votes is required to win a seat. So this would of occurred purely base on 1st preferences:

Obvisiously 2nd, 3rd, as many as you like prefs would change the above, but your prefs stops as soon as it hits a party/independent that reaches the threshold. Sure lunatics will get (above has 3 christian nutters) but they can't be any worse than the Labor / Liberal coalition of panderers of multinationals who are hell bent on destroying our way of life.

Gordon:

MJMI:

04 Oct 2013 12:56:08am

Easily said but not so easily done where there are 100+ names to number.

It's better to change the above the line preference system so that the voter determines where her/his preferences flow. At present this is determined by deals between "parties" and results in candidates with a small number of real preferences ending up in the Senate.

Alpo:

03 Oct 2013 3:11:51pm

"The market economy depends on respect for rules that cannot be enforced by law alone"... In which chapter of the Book of Myths was that ever shown to work? The foundations have always been week, the difference now is that the people are realising it more and more, and they speak up!

It's time for a change. In the USA Obama is doing what he can against an organised reaction by the GOP of Biblical proportions. In Australia we have just entered a three-year phase of deep hibernation.

Alpo:

Pegaso:

03 Oct 2013 11:01:52pm

Obama is experiencing his own version of bloody minded negativity from a rednecked section of the Conservative Republican party, just as Julia Gillard experienced the same from sections of the Abbott Conservatives.Their only crimes were/are that they are intelligent, articulate, educated, one is black the other is a woman, and want to improve the lot of the disadvantaged in their Countries. Notice how the crazies all seem to come from the Conservative side of politics.

frenchie:

03 Oct 2013 3:27:44pm

Interesting you didn't like Clive "buying" his seats or the Unions (Labour party base) but its okay for Gina, Rupert and John Singleton.Some would also say that the campaigns run by the major parties are little better than propaganda as well ie: changing tack after you have won the election, something that is quite common in Australian politics

whogoesthere:

03 Oct 2013 3:36:02pm

It doesn't seem to have bothered anyone that Palmer has basically bought himself a seat in Parliament. Maybe it doesn't matter.

Of course the super-wealthy are above the law, they always have been. That the mega-rich basically rule the world seems to me a believable 'conspiracy theory', as it seems logical. They have much more power than mere politicians.

But in the end, here in democracies, we allow it to happen. Whether by apathy, or anything else, we get what we deserve. People complain endlessly about the supermarket duopoly by they still flock there in droves. We have allowed it to happen, so we either do something, or stop whinging.

Col'n:

04 Oct 2013 2:35:09am

We have allowed it to happen, because a large number of us have not been sufficiently educated and so don't have the tools to prevent anything past the status quo. That's the shame. Look at the diminishing standard of Australian universities compared in the world, and consequently we will realise those who teach don't have the skills to enable us to grab the branch of the tree of life on the bank of the swiftly flowing stream on the outward tide.

MJLC:

"Increasingly, it seems, a globally motivated super-elite come and go as they please, a plutocracy of wealthy individuals that are above the law; indeed, they seem able to make the law"

Just as fascinating are their legions of mouthpieces who will fill pages like this one convincing anyone who'll give them the time of day that the world is actually enslaved by a cabal of dole bludgers, people in koala suits, a handful of pathetically tragic folk bobbing around in boats, and/or assorted non-straight individuals who want to tear marriage as a concept to pieces. Creating scapegoats I believe it's called - there's probably an app you can buy and download to do it for you these days from the Rupert Shop.

markob:

03 Oct 2013 3:38:49pm

Well said. Add to this Ms Rhinehardt's media holdings and the obvious tilting of editorial content (otherwise why buy into a struggling industry?), and Rupert, and we see our democracy becoming hostage to corporate petulance.The ongoing undermining of the integrity of the senate as a representative body via the preference deals means that those of a greener tinge, those who are interested in social fairness, in our environment, are further marginalised to the extent that there are only rare voices of dissent available.I think Australia just had our George Bush moment, like the US did in 2000.To paraphrase Gough, God cannot save our democracy while big money controls our public life.

Polysemantic Pete:

03 Oct 2013 4:05:09pm

"It depends on the owners of business being permitted to maximise their own wealth and incomes in certain defined ways, and on others in society foregoing the opportunity to take advantage of their own positions to do likewise."

The trouble is these days a lot of those maximising their own wealth aren't the owners of the business, they're people parachuted in to look after share-holder interests.

The hardest part is working out where to draw the line and strike a balance. Gina may well say her companies could be far more competetive and profitable if she didn't have to pay a reasonable wage, but it's ludicrous for her to then suggest everyone could be a billionaire if they worked hard enough. Something totally illogical with the maths and economics there.

GraemeF:

03 Oct 2013 4:09:59pm

As a 'vested interest' the union campaign is in a different class. The unions themselves are democratic and the win against WorkChoices was a win for all members, not just profitable for the elite few at the top. Union leaders didn't rake in windfall bonuses or add an extra million or two to their bank accounts.

Iraq is quite an interesting case for the study of business regulation. The invasion was proven to be on 'false' intelligence and yet despite us being at war we had a conga line of businesses rushing in to make a quick profit. AWB, Securency and now Leighton Holdings. Where indeed were our police and intelligence services? They seem to have spent the entire war harassing and spying on peace groups. There is definitely one set of rules for powerful corporations and another set of rules for the average person.

If the Coalition sign on the the latest 'free trade' agreement, the TPP in its current format then we will be signing away more of our democratic rights to how we run our country. Instead we will be at the mercy of trans-national companies in international courts of commerce. Bad luck for the environment or workers trying to maintain wages and conditions.

Veganpuncher:

03 Oct 2013 4:20:59pm

There is a simple cure for this problem: eliminate private political funding. The equation is simple - you and I can't afford to buy an election or a politician, vested interests can, and do. Effectively, political power is removed from the hands of the people and transferred to vested interests. This is the way banana republics work.

Without wanting to panic anyone, perhaps we would do well to consider the politics of the US where money has become the sole factor in politics, completely overwhelming good policy and the rule-of-law. Australia is not quite there yet, but I would be happier if any chance of it were nipped in the bud.

The problem is that I do not have a fair and workable alternative. Any suggestions?

mikemwa:

03 Oct 2013 7:32:24pm

Unfortunately eliminating private political funding won't stop people manipulating the system. Nor will it stop the bias in the media that occurred in the last four years. I used to believe that our democracy was robust and fair and unlikely to ever be compromised. I am no longer sure that is the case.

Albert:

The Greeks had the problem sorted out. They knew that voting for office would favour those with the most prestige, power or money, so they did not vote for members of their senate.

All citizens were eligible for a ballot and those selected at random were members of their equivalent of parliament for the next year. This saves a lot of campaigning and vote buying and you actually get a group of members who roughly represent the population, with no discrimination against minority groups (apart from women in the Greek case, but we can fix that).

LH:

Matt:

Dove:

03 Oct 2013 9:10:13pm

I agree. The downside of a democracy is that you're free to splash your own money around, in ways that amount to buying votes, buying parties and buying elections. It's a problem as old as civilisation. If you accept that the country is being run for the benefit of vested interests and that the people merely choose between the preselected candidates of parties funded by the same vested interests as one another, then many explanations fall into place. No much of a solution I'm afraid.

DaveD:

04 Oct 2013 10:00:45am

Anarchism is the solution. When it has been in practise (Aboriginal societies 50,000BC to 1788, Spain 1920's and 30's and The Ukraine 1930's) it worked extremely well and society functioned at a level never seen before so it had been crushed, by fascists (big business) and communists alike.

But I'm more than happy to a ballot to select randomly all members of parliament, can't be any worse than what we have now.

jennbrad:

04 Oct 2013 1:58:17pm

Aboriginal societies were not anarchistic - they had quite a sophisticated system involving moieties/clans/elder rule. Presumably it worked well as it lasted (probably with some changes over the centuries) for thousands of years.

bigbluemav:

03 Oct 2013 4:24:23pm

One of the biggest issues I have with the Australian electorate is that we are so easily lead and distracted by vested interests. The sooner we realise that these vested interests DO NOT have OUR best interests at heart, the better off we'll ALL be!

The behaviour of the Murdoch press in the recent election is a perfect case in point - their behaviour was nothing short of contemptible!

The sooner that we start looking after OUR OWN interests, the sooner we'll get a better Govt. At the moment we truly are getting the Govt that we deserve.

mikemwa:

03 Oct 2013 9:32:24pm

What amazed me and still frustrates me is the failure of most journalists to see that they were being spun by the Liberal Party. For four years most reported gossip as if it was news and accepted the Liberal Party propaganda without questioning it. If that acquiescence continues, and there are already signs that it will, then there isn't much hope for the future of democracy in this country.

mikemwa:

03 Oct 2013 4:24:33pm

In the new world order governments are now secondary to the multinationals who manipulate governments to further their own interests and avoid tax along with social and environmental responsibilities where ever possible. Instead of being a watershed that led to changes in how they were allowed to operate the GFC has become just a hiccup for them. When the next crisis happens and it is likely to be sooner rather than later the damage is likely to be far more widespread and last a lot longer.

matt:

03 Oct 2013 7:40:15pm

It wasn't a hiccup, they engineered it. Doesn't anybody else remember the shameless manipulation of the petroleum market before the GFC. Every time there was so much as the threat of a storm in the gulf of Mexico hysterical headlines would scream out about rigs shutting down, workers being evacuated, supplies threatened and prices going up, problem is that happens every year in the hurricane season yet since the GFC, not a peep, funny that. The fact that speculators were holding huge reserves parked offshore in supertankers missed the "mainstream press" too for some odd reason.Then when the time was right, boom all the credit "dried up" and suddenly a whole lot of people went to the wall, and what was the end result five years later, the top ten percent has increased its wealth dramatically thanks to the biggest flow of public money into private hands in history and the fat cats like Joe Hockey tell us with a straight face that the age of entitlement is over. In time, maybe if the truth ever gets out, it will be exposed for what it was, the greatest crime in history, I'm not holding my breath I have to say.Meanwhile we just have to accept this new age of feudalism we are slipping into, the people voted for it and unless we can vote ourselves out of it then people just have to grin and bear it.

notinventedhere:

03 Oct 2013 4:25:53pm

Perhaps we can all take comfort from history. The last time an ill defined party appeared from nowhere on a protest vote, and get senators elected, it was Pauline Hanson and one nation. That party proved shambolic, no one had any loyalty to a party that they had no real say in, and everyone went their own way. Having an egotistical madman as leader can only accelerate that.

I predict wildly entertaining shenanigans that will lead to a single term (unfortunately, that is 6 years) for the glove puppets of Jabba the Hutt.

Idiocracy:

03 Oct 2013 4:54:06pm

If Australian's can't see through the hype and the propoganda bought and paid for by special interest groups, isn't that thier fault for being so easily led? Isn't that the price of being too lazy to bother taking an interest in politics and your childrens future?

Unless the election laws have been broken, you can't blame anyone but the voters.

sdrawkcaB:

03 Oct 2013 4:54:30pm

I find the second last paragraph interesting.

On a personal note, the last 15 years has seen me largely ignore any law where I am not going to get caught. I also have no respect whatsoever for any government minister and minimal respect for a government institution.

It largely started for me when Howard started his campaign of lies and manipulation. I did not see the point in playing by the rules when the highest office holder gave it such low importance.

I would imagine that if 15 million people took on my attitude, the system would fall by lunch time tomorrow.

That said, I am fully prepared to go back to taking the extra step for the sake of the community but not while the system is being bled as it currently is.

Hudson Godfrey:

03 Oct 2013 4:55:34pm

Everybody knows that the dice are loaded Everybody rolls with their fingers crossed Everybody knows that the war is over Everybody knows the good guys lost Everybody knows the fight was fixed The poor stay poor, the rich get rich That's how it goes Everybody knows

jennbrad:

04 Oct 2013 2:02:15pm

Hollywood mainstream seems to have forgotten that good movies come from good stories, well written scripts, good characters and the result well made - good movies don't result from lots of CGI, special effects and 3D, unless the other qualities are there too.

RosieA:

04 Oct 2013 7:41:05am

Yes, we have abandoned our desire for good in favour of the desire for goods. Frequent Flyer Points or rewards of some sort and product cheapness, are far more important than company ethics, for example. The common man has been bought. So much so that when good men and women do do something to rectify the situation, they are torn to shreds. Look no further than what is happening to previous legislation and institutions established to reduce our emissions.

The destructiveness that we tolerate, both toward each other and toward our environment, is unbelievable but as those who have the power realized long ago, if the masses are kept content in their own little worlds, they wont be concerned about the bigger picture.

Hudson Godfrey:

04 Oct 2013 9:02:19am

I think the sentiment is in its right place....

When it comes to speaking generally I happen to think egalitarianism is an ideal that has more merit than plutocracy, but it takes Burke out of context to more or less assume he meant the common man is good and all plutocrats are evil on an individual level. Bill Gates, so I'm told, is quite philanthropic.

In other words it isn't just what the common man allows. It also follows that we must question why if an apex leader is a good man, as Obama seems to be, he could yet be forced to allow house Republicans things that they want in flagrant disregard of the greater good.

Andrew Thomas:

04 Oct 2013 11:15:58am

Hi Hudson,

I am not in complete disagreement with you. Your points do highlight part of the problem.

However, I think we have all allowed complacency and laziness to give oursleves permission to stand back and simply blame the "government" or well funded special interest groups, or similar. But I am not buying this. Rest assured, if all those people effected by the USA Government Shutdown went onto the streets and demanded the Rebulicans pull their heads in, they would. By that virtue, the "common man" allows a small minority to make poor decisions on behalf of the majority. That is, the let them do it.

rufus t firefly:

salvarsan:

03 Oct 2013 5:06:38pm

I can't see anything wrong with a few new faces being elected by our particular version of democratic elections. Despite the criticism by those who do not like them, there is nothing to say things will not work out as well as having a motley crew holding the balance of power as happened these last six or so years. No party has a god given right to govern without challenge, that is what elections are for. There will be another in three years. Get over it.

Dave9:

03 Oct 2013 5:09:00pm

You are correct about the elitists. The Murdoch press proved as much. Unfortunately we do not see the faceless men on either side of politics. Business leaders can not see past their noses. They are unable to make Australia a "better" place as this allows them to maintain their wealth, as in the days of the Ancient Roman Empire. More slaves make sense.

Another Aussie:

Antandrian:

03 Oct 2013 5:55:57pm

Indeed - econcomic and cultural over-maturity following a long period of stability, especially in the face of incipient resource shortages, inevitably leads to concentration of wealth and political power, and entrenched interests to the direct and indirect detriment of the majority.

The current housing crisis across the Western world, maintained by bureaucratic disinterest in permitting a rate of development that keeps pace with the number of households, is an integral part of this. The resulting situation of sustained prices on the edge of affordability favour landlords with substantial portfolios as security for further business lending over would-be private owner-occupiers with modest resources accrued from their pay packets.

At a fundamental level Fred Hirsch is only reiterating what Karl Marx observed and predicted in 1867, that left to its own devices a capitalist economy will eventually self strangulate by means of its progressive and inexorable concentration of wealth and power. Marx of course predicted revolution as the natural conclusion to capitalism, but that was in a historical cultural context that lacked the checks and balances and information channels of current mature democracies. It really is anybody's guess how economic and political developments will proceed during the 21st century. But we could be in for some shocking surprises.

What this checklist misses, however, is how all this was achieved. Pluck the word "media" from that list, present it front and centre, underline it, put it in bold, and even italics.

Heck stick it in capitals, and add revolving sparkles.

MEDIA.

Until news and journalism are given the same purity laws as champagne, we'll continue to see this process of monopolisation repeated, over and again, as an uninformed public keep voting for more of the same.

willg:

Mycal:

03 Oct 2013 6:06:18pm

If one used "dialectic materialism" to analyse this issue, one would surmise that "the plutocracy" is a natural and predictable outcome of unconstrained capitalism. But one probably shouldn't do that least you be accused of being a socialist or worse. The current situation is a direct consequence of neoconservative libertarianism and it is a corruption of the democratic process, it will lead to the corporatist state. If you look at polls, the recent election results, even the people who post here, there appears to be precious little concern about it.

lindsay Cooper:

03 Oct 2013 6:10:28pm

O' migosh has some one finally discovered that the world of democracy as it now stands is a total fallacy that the world has blindly accepted without query.

Why doesn't anyone get it, the whole world is run by criminals and has been like this for a very long time. They are just treating the rest of us as idiots and it appears that they are correct to assume that this is the case.

Turn your mobiles off for a while and give yourself time to think, also highly unlikely to happen.

Andy:

04 Oct 2013 7:50:59am

Alas, once a smart person sees the truth they do what is right for them and their family. Head down, look after yourself, err on side of cynicism over idealism... Right where they want us!Sometimes I think the preppers have it right...create your own civilisation cos the rest of the world isn't interested in being civil. A shelter, from pigs on the wing.

OmegaEconomics:

03 Oct 2013 6:29:49pm

Good article.

When we have intellectual lightweights like the Institute of Public Affairs (IPA), masquerading as defenders of the public interest, you know this nation is in trouble. Never once have I heard them promulgate policy to tackle;

The medical cartel;The lawyer cartel;The superannuation rort; which sees $20 billion lost in fees to super funds that cannot even beat industry/ union super funds;The supermarket duopoly - with the highest margins in the Western world;The CEO/ Executive rort; where CEOs/ Executives and are paid far more in Australia than more successful economies - like Germany, South Korea and Switzerland, etc.

The only thing I hear from IPA (a shallow corporate mouth-piece) is a desire to limit wages of the lowest paid. They never tackle the aforesaid high paid institutional and corporate rorters.

KevinS:

03 Oct 2013 6:42:32pm

I've been plotting each economic turn and economic policy decision in Australia and major world markets since 2008.Capitalism is fading away unless some sensible regulation and business ethics return. Capitalism is strongest, most innovative and wealth spreading and from my economic perspective, exciting when competition is active and transparent; where risk taken within acceptable measures and legal boundaries and behaviours are part of it.Since 2008 Risk is underwritten by the little people, not investors or shareholders who pass their losses on every day people to bear the cost and pain. Recklessness using other peoples money is the new high stakes game. Wall St won that game. in the current climate, wealth generation accelerates for fewer but richer players, regardless of economic performance or adherence to remaining laws whilst the benefits of increasing wealth is denied to more and more others.

Capitalism reached its zenith in the 1950's and 1960's where the middle class in Western nations was at its highest and most debt free.The years 2000-2008 actually saw a major contraction in the middle class, which has continued to contract since when individual personal debt was assessed against standard of living and capacity to meet discretionary spending aims. Credit became the means for the middle class to stay in middle class homes; pay fees for middle class quality education for children and other tangibles by which the middle class claim a social place in the economic world.

Economically our capitalist system in Australia and the first world has reached a crucial point. If our law makers do not take a stand and our politicians do not find the backbone they will preside over the deathknell of Australia's middle sector which is the generator of and consumer for continuing economic growth. Howardesque middle class and corporate handouts is not the answer. Active, transparent and honest economic competition is.Australian competition policy and legislation was not intended to create duopolies and oligopolists that in effect share in monopolies that control every aspect of our economic lives: an environment where small business stand little chances of prospering.

Stirrer:

03 Oct 2013 6:51:27pm

Thank the Lord for the ABC. Can anyone imagine any of the News Ltd outlets publishing or airing such truth as contained in this article.";In every major sector,duopolists and oligolists reign. Whether is banks, supermarkets,retailers, airlines,resources,media,packaging.food and beverages,tranpsort, logistics, you name it,competetion is thin on the ground".The too big to fail are now just too bog to regulate and getting bigger.The party which holds itself up as the defender of freedom, democracy, private enterprise, small business and the individual is nothing but prisoner of the oligopolists. Witness the stated intention for the removal of the carbon and mining taxes and introduction of industrial reforms.Rather than foster the new SMEs which will drive the coming Third Industrial Revolution- which will create thousands of small businesses and hundreds of thousands of new jobs. the LNP is doing all it can to to kill if off- in the interests of the BIG money and LESS competition.

Corruption allegations? corruption reality more likely- it is the system we have allowed to develop. Its not just the American but the global economy which has been blown up.They are above the law- the ARE able to make the law.

What will it take for these truths to sink into the minds and hearts of the brainwashed rusted ons? Maybe a depression and the adverse effects of climate change will do it.Does not seem logic and common sense will do it=pity.

pragmatist:

04 Oct 2013 12:51:42am

Thank you Stirrer , reading your comment saved me from going over all the issues that you have covered.

I could not agree more. I worry about being an Australian.When an expat media mogul can smother the truth and campaign more effectively that the libs themselves , you know something is seriously amiss.

Andrew Smith:

03 Oct 2013 7:25:21pm

Special or vested interests are fine if open and transparent about who they are, and it's not only the domain of the right i.e. DLP reincarnated as Labor and coalition.

While Australia's media (medium?) seem incapable of analysis and scrutiny, any single interest group can be confident in having their message or PR release transmitted (repeatedly e.g. miners vs Rudd in 2010), accepted at face value and embedded in the national psyche (often through shouting).

In addition to the popular memes attractive or useful to the right, are those taken on board by Labor e.g. population growth and net overseas migration, without any insight whatsoever (which also benefits the real estate industry's meme of ever increasing prices due to population growth).

Over the years US based organised anti immigration network of John Tanton has been able to provide Australians of all political shades an excuse to oppose immigration of different 'shades' .....

Much of this influence is via The Social Contract Press founded by John Tanton (former mucker of Paul Ehrlich) and has been described as:

?The Social Contract Press (TSCP) routinely publishes race-baiting articles penned by white nationalists. The press is a program of U.S. Inc, the foundation created by John Tanton, the racist founder and principal ideologue of the modern nativist movement. TSCP puts an academic veneer of legitimacy over what are essentially racist arguments about the inferiority of today?s immigrants? (originally they were leveraged by neo cons to split the progressive vote in the USA, but changing demographics have GOP running a mile from them nowadays).

The issue isn't right vs left, business vs society but transparency, media analysis and clear thinking..... though nowadays it's more about belief and following the majority......

?.The Social Contract Press (TSCP) was founded in 1990 by John Tanton, a man who has set up and funded several anti-immigration groups over the past 30 years. TSCP is the publishing wing of Tanton?s network of organizations. In addition to putting out books, many of them extremely anti-immigrant, TSCP prints a quarterly journal, The Social Contract, which has featured articles by dozens of white nationalists and anti-immigrant extremists.?

?..perhaps its most inflammatory publication is The Immigration Invasion. Put out in 1994, the book was co-written by Tanton and white nationalist Wayne Lutton, The Social Contract?s current editor. It is so incendiary that Canadian border authorities have banned it as hate literature?

?.The winter 2006-2007 issue of The Social Contract consisted entirely of reprints of articles from the hate site VDARE.com, which features racist and anti-Semitic articles.? http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-files/groups/the-social-contract-press

Who in Australia has contributed and is linked to The Social Contract Pres

Treetop:

03 Oct 2013 8:11:49pm

It seems that almost anyone can win a Senate seat as long as they spend a lot of money on advertising .Advertising does work and it seems that many gullible people will buy almost anything as long as it is advertised Millions and millions of people have died through cigarette smoking and in the past cigarette companies have spent a fortune of advertising to get people hooked on the deadly habit .The strange thing about the Clive Palmer is that many people who usually vote Labor voted for his party and in the past Clive Palmer has been mainly by his comments shown to be the exact opposite to Labor with his political views .The last week of the last election campaign when the P.U.P started it's large advertising campaign , I did pick-up that people were listening to him and his vote would be much higher than expected .I heard many people on the public transport talking about the $150 pension increase which was very appealing for them to vote for the P.U.P The political betting agencies got the result wrong by the large odds that they were offering about Clive Palmer and his parties Senate chances. It is possible for corporations to buy their way into government in Australia .Gina Reinhardt wanted to buy into Fairfax Newspapers so she could get editorial comment control , it would not be a surprise to see people like her could get into parliament by a huge advertising budget The only thing that they would have to do is spend about billion dollars on a advertising campaign and by a big budget campaign they would wipe out most of their opposition because advertising can bring results even when the product being offered doesn't have much substance .

RosieA:

04 Oct 2013 7:48:42am

Exactly, ru4real. My question is, how do those of us who are concerned, stand up against the domination by the powerful? Is it more of the 99% protests? I am tired of powerful interests doing as they please to the detriment of the planet and so much of life, human and non-human alike.

Thanks David Llewellyn-Smith for pointing out what is going on....it can't be said too often. One day, enough people might hear.

Johnno:

Asceptic:

04 Oct 2013 5:23:56am

Modern capitalism seems to have morphed into a machine to transfer wealth from the masses to the wealthy.

"During the seven-year economic expansion of the Clinton administration, the top 1 per cent captured 45 per cent of the total growth in pre-tax income; while during the four-year expansion of the Bush administration the top 1 per cent captured 73 per cent. ? This is not a misprint"

KevinS:

04 Oct 2013 7:57:14am

Just so your very pertinent and important point is understood by as many people as possible, Asceptic, I'm providing an explanation. Asceptic is providing evidence of a large contraction in the US middle class and a widening in the poverty gap.The same economic conditions have been present in Australia since the Howard government. It is unlikely to change, unless politicians regulate and create the policies that places corporations within the same rights and responsibilities sphere that the rest of us have to operate in. The world's richest 200 corporations know this, that is why focus has been on controlling politics and governments.The GFC failed to rein in corporate excesses and it will take an even greater economic tragedy to bring about change.

Matt:

04 Oct 2013 7:22:08am

It is the bug in the human system, or the classic historical dilemma, that drives the majority of our misfortunes, and that shapes the culture that justifies our perpetually far less than optimal state of existence.

The acquisition of wealth and power allows others to be managed, or farmed, and resources to be exploited, in ways that perpetuate or further that wealth and power.

Those with it tend to seek to do this, furthermore in the most expedient ways. That which serves them best as individuals by nature not being that which generally serves the collective good.

Many of the steps they take, like encouraging the 'livestock' to breed, wrecking the environment, and producing states of impoverishment, add further impetus to the desire to perpetuate or increase wealth and power, because not having it means not just missing out on the best fruits of human endeavor (being kicked off the teat), it means descending into what has become a palpably nasty strata of the 'social pyramid' thus created.

This dynamic has seeded itself the world over, and its offspring are merging to become a single system.

What progress we have achieved is where we have got together and used our collective ability to manufacture cultural limits (laws and punishments) to curb the ability of those with wealth and power to use it in exploitative and damaging ways.

But it is not working too well, is it, it is a very difficult hump to overcome. We have been going backwards under the rule of those who have of late been holding the wealth and power reigns. That is, as this dynamic develops momentum on this continent.

LOL, we need a law against selfishness, which might be loosely defined as using others in ways in which the orchestrator of the relationship profits disproportionately. But unfortunately, it is a cultural characteristic that has been enshrined as 'innate', or as immutable and unassailable, and all too often it is actually seen as virtuous.

Matt:

M.S:

04 Oct 2013 7:57:14am

Wow, just the shear pessimism and powerlessness that oozes from this articles truths and in subsequent comments is breath taking!

Okay everybody, lets get everyone some blankets and hot chocolate and curl up in a ball and complacently watch the plight of humanity, our institutions and our planet fall prey to the 0.1% of humanity with true malevolent intent while the other 99.99% curls up in a ball with a blanket and hot chocolate to watch it happen...

... or we can, you know, fight?! This has been the way things have always been run, and there was never a time business or vested interests never had a say. But Australia and humanity broadly has always fought back with pressure on our institutions and the fact that all giant corruptions will eventually be destroyed if we are willing to work hard enough and be effective at finding them and stopping them. The difference between then and now is we know this, and pretty much everything, and we have the means to make it happen.

It's not all doom and gloom, its about thinking and informing others of whats going on and using what we have (and in our democrasy, we have plenty) to effect real changes, from the community up to the monarchy. Come on, lets clean out this scum!

Stirrer:

04 Oct 2013 8:59:36am

ctually M.S. we would do better to get blankets and a hot chocolate and curl up in a ball than to continue in our merry delusional way of aiding and abbetting the crooks by supporting them finanicially (by going into further personal and sovereugn debt) and politically.No- its certainly not all doom and gloom and there are those who are fighting back. In spite of their idealistic but unrealistic hang ups over asylum seekers and their inability to comminicate their economic message properly the Greens do offer a viable alternative.However the fact that there are only 74 comments on such an important article as this one and the way MSM shuts out any message other than that approved by the oligarchs is proff of how difficult the fight back will be.As I said in my previous post -when the recession/depression hits and/or when the adverse effects of climate change become clearer is maybe when the delusional will rise from their slumber.The malevolent 1% has Abbott like rat cunning and will try to boil us slowly -like frogs placed in cold water over a hot stove. But keep fighting we must- history tells us all corrupt, brutal, unjust, feudal, greedy and scummy institutions, corporations, Governments and individuals come to a sticky end-either by self destruction or by revolution.

lindsay Cooper:

04 Oct 2013 10:38:16am

Stirrer; "But keep fighting we must- history tells us all corrupt, brutal, unjust, feudal, greedy and scummy institutions, corporations, Governments and individuals come to a sticky end-either by self destruction or by revolution."

R.Ambrose Raven:

04 Oct 2013 8:33:24am

Let's recall how we arrived here.

Now that the dust has settled on 2007, we are being presented with a carefully orchestrated rewriting of the cause of the pre-2007 debt-driven asset-price bubble, plus the already failed policy of austerity presented the only permissible solution.

Thus the Great Recession is presented as being due to an excess of socialism, with the role of the banksters carefully airbrushed out. On the contrary, the Global Financial Crisis/Great Recession was the bursting of the post-1980 debt-driven asset-price bubble that was created by transnational capitalism through the political groups it owns to feed its greed. Capitalists were enabled to increase their share of National Income by expropriating the productivity surplus that workers were creating. Income-earners were pressured and persuaded to make up for that relative loss of purchasing power by indulging in an unsustainable consumption binge fed by debt borrowed from the wealthiest.

Since 2007, the world has faced dramatic deleveraging; in blunt terms, output, employment and asset values must collapse, all having been a house of cards built on quicksand. Thus we face a synchronized downturn in almost all countries, a general loss of confidence, and big economic and social problems.

Far from returning to the good old days, QE is to intended to preserve the wealth of the wealthy (and in practice is increasing it) for as long as possible, with as much as possible of the debt and cost offloaded from business to government and society. Genuinely better solutions such as a 24-hour working week on 38-hour pay will be resolutely rejected because they benefit the masses but not the moneybags.

HYUFD:

sirmikd:

04 Oct 2013 9:16:01am

David L-S "a mining magnate took just a few weeks to buy the balance of power in the Senate.'

So are you saying that the public vote had nothing to do with it ? Regardless of how much Palmer spent on the PUP campaign he still needed the public's votes and achieved it in much the same way as any other party does with the money received from their supporters.Stop trying to skew the picture.

Breach of Peace:

04 Oct 2013 9:34:45am

"Propaganda campaigns from vested interests unduly influenced the past three elections"? This has been going on overtly and covertly for over a hundred years. We not only have the Australian plutocracy at work but overseas has its huge influence here with the establishment of duopolies and corporations. Australia has not been a democratic nation for some time, it is a mere facade of what democracy ought to be. It is a skeleton that has been stripped of its checks and balances concerning due process, abuse of power and we have the real genuine legal Commonwealth of Australia compared to the US ABN registered corporation COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA with their seals and acting in stealth right before the eyes of Australians 'masquerading' as a government.

It is an illusion and the greatest scam in Australia's history, the 'Australian Government' is an American Corporation registered in the District of Columbia, United States. We are witnessing a merger of hostile corporate power by stealth with governmental power to falsely deceive the masses. the structure of fascism is corporatism, or the corporate state. The structure of fascism is the union, marriage, merger or fusion of corporate economic power with governmental power. The Australian Emblem or National Symbol is a hoax: copyrighted, registered and owned by the US Department of Commerce.

R.Ambrose Raven:

04 Oct 2013 9:56:42am

A few things to bear in mind.

Go to Cuba for the best health care in North and South America.

White Americans with low educational levels have already lost an average of four years from their life expectancy between 1990 and 2008- 5% of their average lifespan. Compare it with post-Soviet Russia, where the collapse of the state-run system and an epidemic of alcoholism cut seven years from the life of the average Russian. Yet average global life expectancy across the planet rose by 7% from 1990 to 2010. On the global scale, Americans rank 36th for longevity with an average 78.3 years, almost identical to Cubans, who have one-fifth the level of income.

There is a deep and widening divide in America. but it is deceitful and dishonest to promote the ruling class plunder of America's people and its future as being anything but the opposite of socialism. But then, such denialists not only regard truth as whatever serves the needs of the moment, but consider themselves entitled to their own facts.

Using the beginning of 2008 as a base, cumulative real GDP growth in Australia, the U.S. and the U.K. as at the end of 2011 was 30%, 15% and 12% respectively. Our economy has grown about 11% since the end of 2007 while the US has grown only by about 1.75% and many European countries are substantially smaller due to the massive recessions they have endured. Such socialism as we have deserves the credit for that. You want growth? You need egalitarianism!

RobP:

04 Oct 2013 12:10:46pm

Another way of looking at your figures, is that the US is reaching saturation point. There's no doubt that it has been the home of most modern technological developments for the past 150 years or more. So, the fairness principle of "You get out what you put in" has applied, and so it should. But, as the global dynamics change and as Thomas Friedman's flat-earth world comes into being, all of a sudden the depth of the US's expertise will become redundant.

Society, I would suspect, will then start to come back into balance, in the human and environmental as well as the economic spheres. A massive consequence will be that the depth and narrowness of expertise/standards will be replaced by a shallower version, but which comes with greater opportunity for more people across the world. The transformation could be given the epithet, "From silo to windowbox". Give it another decade or two, and it will be breaking out everywhere, I reckon.

Leon Nayr:

04 Oct 2013 1:04:56pm

Perhaps we should scrap elections altogether and save a lot of time and money? Political parties seem to have lost contact with their membership and the ordinary people anyway. Seats could be offered on e-Bay instead. Given the alarming results in the recent Senate election, where a handful of individuals representing narrow, minority interests secured Senate seats with minuscule numbers of votes through trades of preferences with other minority interest groups, the idea merits consideration. It seems that what worked for Canadian e-Bay trader Kyle MacDonald some years back, who traded a box of paper clips for a house, our Upper House could likewise be traded for a handful of paper clips.

Hubert:

Nothing new here really though is there? Science Fiction writers have touched on this many a time, depicting a future earth where Corporations ARE the Government.

To be fair, there are a number of areas in which Corporations and Democracy are at odds. It therefore stands to reason that Corporations will seek to either undermine, or control the "democratic process" for their own gain.